Burma/Bangladesh Burmese Refugees in Bangladesh: Still No Durable Solution
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
May 2000 Vol 12., No. 3 (C) BURMA/BANGLADESH BURMESE REFUGEES IN BANGLADESH: STILL NO DURABLE SOLUTION I. SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................................................2 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................................3 To the Government of Burma.............................................................................................................................3 To the Government of Bangladesh.....................................................................................................................4 To the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees ............................................................4 II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND .........................................................................................................................5 World War II, Independence, and Rohingya Flight ...............................................................................................6 Operation Nagamin and the 1970s Exodus ............................................................................................................7 Flight in the 1990s..............................................................................................................................................8 Continued Obstacles to Repatriation ..................................................................................................................8 III. DISCRIMINATION IN ARAKAN.....................................................................................................................9 Denial of Citizenship..............................................................................................................................................9 Freedom of Movement .....................................................................................................................................11 Education and Employment..............................................................................................................................12 Arbitrary Confiscation of Property...............................................................................................................12 Forced Labor ................................................................................................................................................12 IV. CONDITIONS IN THE CAMPS......................................................................................................................15 Registration: Withholding Essential Services as Leverage .................................................................................15 Physical Abuse .....................................................................................................................................................16 V. UNDOCUMENTED ROHINGYA ....................................................................................................................17 Refugee status determination............................................................................................................................19 VI. THE SEARCH FOR DURABLE SOLUTIONS...............................................................................................21 Voluntary Repatriation .........................................................................................................................................21 Protection and Prevention: The United Nations in Northern Arakan..................................................................25 Local Integration ..................................................................................................................................................26 Resettlement .........................................................................................................................................................27 Human Rights Watch 1 May 2000, Vol. 12,No. 3(C) I. SUMMARY Since 1991, Bangladesh has been the main country of refuge for members of the Muslim Rohingya minority in Burma's Arakan State, many thousands of whom have fled gross human rights violations perpetrated by the Burmese government. In 1991-92 alone, discrimination, violence and the imposition of forced labor practices by Burmese authorities triggered an exodus of some 250,000 Rohingya across the border into Bangladesh. Most of these refugees returned between 1993 and 1997 under a repatriation program arranged through the auspices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The future of 22,000 Rohingya who remain in refugee camps in Bangladesh, however, remains unclear. Donor countries, frustrated by the lack of progress in finally resettling these remaining refugees, have reduced the level of support available to them. Meanwhile, continuing discrimination against, attacks upon, and other widespread violations of the rights of Rohingya in Burma have led to new refugee outflows into Bangladesh. More than 100,000 Rohingya, who have not been formally documented as refugees, now live in Bangladesh outside the refugee camps. Their situation too remains precarious. This report describes the key obstacles which have up to now prevented the satisfactory resolution of this major refugee problem, with particular attention to completion of the agreed repatriation program. The primary obstacles are to be found on the Burmese side of the border. Burma‘s ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), which replaced the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), persists in its policy of denying Burmese citizenship rights to most Rohingya on the grounds that they comprise an alien population on Burmese soil. As a direct consequence, Rohingya are treated as aliens in their own country, and are being subjected to restrictions on their freedom of movement, arbitrary taxation, and extortion by local officials. Rohingya villagers also continue to be required to undertake forced labor by local Burmese officials, who sometimes threaten to have them killed if they refuse to comply. UNHCR has had a permanent presence in Arakan state since 1994 and has assisted many Rohingya returnees, but it has limited funding and has been unable, in practice, to provide adequate protection to many of the refugees who have returned to Burma. It was also initially hampered by Burmese government restrictions on access to certain areas and constant surveillance of its projects. UNHCR is now in the process of handing over responsibility for assisting the reintegration of Rohingya to the U.N. Integrated Programme (UN-IP), an umbrella group of other U.N. agencies concerned with development in Burma, and is considering reducing its own presence. If this occurs, it likely will increase the vulnerability of the Rohingya to further abuse. While some of the agencies involved in the UN-IP have expressed interest in more fully integrating human rights considerations into their policies and programs, they lack both the mandate and the expertise necessary to ensure adequate protection for the Rohingya. In Bangladesh, the situation in the refugee camps has been at virtual impasse since a combination of unrest within the camps and pressure from the Burmese government led to the temporary suspension of the repatriation program in mid-1997. It then formally recommenced in November 1998 but under such restrictive conditions imposed by the Burmese authorities that very few of the remaining Rohingya who wanted to repatriate were able to return to Burma. Indeed, only 799 Rohingya were repatriated from the camps between November 1998 and October 1999 while, in the same period, the total number in the camps was swelled by the births of almost 1200 children. In early 2000, however, the Burmese government has lifted some of the restrictions in force since November 1998 and promised to remove the others, opening up the possibility of an increase in the flow of returns. If this does occur, close and continuing involvement by UNHCR will be essential in ensuring that any such returns are truly voluntary and that returning Rohingya are not subject to renewed persecution in Burma. Despite various improvements, abuses in the refugee camps in Bangladesh have also continued. In the past, administrators at the Nayapara and Kutupalong camps used coercion to induce refugees to return to Burma. More recently, in May 1999, in an effort to complete a census registration of all families in the two camps, authorities confiscated the —family books“ of a number of refugee families who refused to cooperate. Family books are the only legal form of identification for Rohingya in the camps and are essential for obtaining support, including food Human Rights Watch 2 May 2000, Vol. 12,No. 3(C) and medical care. The families had apparently refused to fill out registration forms on the mistaken fear that doing so would increase the likelihood that they would be forcibly repatriated. The authorities‘ response exacerbated the mistrust. Refugees who fail to abide by camp regulations also continue to be subject to beatings and other forms of physical abuse, although camp administrators have begun in some cases to take disciplinary action against the responsible camp staff. The Rohingya who remain in refugee camps represent a minority of the total number of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, and, due in large part to continuing abuses against